Comments on: Biggest California CO2 emitter is…http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/
Global environmental challengesWed, 16 Nov 2016 08:14:55 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5By: Dennis Whttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343239
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:52:41 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343239James, this was a handful of scientists acting like dopes. You have not read their e-mails. You’ve seen selected portions of them wherein this small group of individuals is venting steam and acting petty. There’s nothing in these supposed “smoking gun” e-mails that could possibly negate the work of thousands of scientists across the planet over the past 30 years. It’s really grasping at straws in your denial efforts to claim that a few bellicose fools acting indiscrete and talking trash about other scientists whose work they see as shoddy is “proof” of anything. But of course you see what you choose to see.This is not a partisan issue–I’m completely snowed as to how it became one. This is our future, together, on this planet. If you don’t believe in science, I suggest you quit driving your car (it might just randomly go off the road), stop taking whatever medicines you’re taking (they might randomly not work), and start teaching your kids that there is no evolution, that God isn’t clever enough to create species that advance on their own. Oh… sorry, you already do that.See, now I’m getting petty, just like those British scientists. So I guess this proves no one on the planet is civil or polite, anywhere, ever. That’s science, right?
]]>By: Jameshttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343218
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:11:48 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343218First and foremost let’s drop the act. The scientists who presented the findings held in such high regard have been found to be obviscating the facts. As well they went out of their way to surpress any opposing view thru various means. When you close of legitimate discourse becuase it dosn’t agree with your viewpoint to make your viewpoint the only option then you 1) Have no faith in your findings or 2) Are lying and don’t want to get caught.Regardless of the reality they have lost all credibility which in turn makes the findings suspect.
]]>By: Dennis Whttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343190
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:17:40 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343190Seattle Dad makes my point much better than I can. Looking at a temporary cooling spell in the face of 150 years of dramatic warming (more dramatic than in the past 150,000 years) can easily lead someone who doesn’t want to believe climate change is real to jump to these kinds of conclusions. Which is why we’re having so much trouble taking action on this extremely dangerous human-made phenomenon.The reason they changed the term to “climate change” has similar roots: “warming” of the planet causes all sorts of effects, from increased/decreased rain in some areas to increases in regional snowfall to changes in ocean currents, etc. etc. They changed the name in part to keep simple-minded, anti-science thinkers from jumping to ignorant conclusions from limited data sets. Didn’t work all that well. Except people who read the science absolutely understand the need for the label change.The Himalayan glaciers will be gone within about 20 years–that’s an easily observable fact, even to an anti-scientist who simply looks at photos from different decades. Those glaciers are the water source for millions of people. Where will they get their water when the glaciers are gone? What will happen? The simple answer: war. Atlanta nearly ran out of water a couple of years ago. Anybody notice that? And did you notice the interstate arguing that arose regarding who had rights to the trickle that was left? A tiny taste of things to come.But trying to convince those who won”t look at the facts (or look at them through the eyes of other heavily invested deniers) is a fool’s errand, so I’ll quit playing the fool. Dave S has the right idea, though I get discouraged in my work on climate change issues at times and want it all to just go away (not so different from the deniers, except my denial tends to be temporary). Solutions are the proper focus, and lots of people are working on them. There are technologies out there right now, and our president is correct in saying there’s great economic opportunity in developing them. Political will is the key. Sadly, I suspect pain will be required to get people really moving. Even EPA is dragging its feet, and most of the line folks in the agency know fully well that this is a catastrophe coming down the pike. But we make EPA act or not act. I pray that the pain that gets us moving is pain that can be reversed.
]]>By: jlrleehttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343189
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:29:18 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343189Dennis W, one of the problems with your argument concerning “Well, science either “works” or it doesn’t work” is the fact that there is no consensus in the scientific community concerning human-caused global warming. Until you can convince a majority of scientists on this subject, you will not convince a majority of general citizens. Now, before you respond to say that a majority of scientists are “believers”, you need to consider if the only publications you read are from the IPCC, remember the IPCC only allow “believers” to publish, a fact proven in the stolen emails. If you truly want to be well-grounded and not just spout the same slogans that Al Gore uses, you should first read the hundreds of articles published by scientific “non-believers”. If you are open-minded, you will change your dogmatic behavior and become more open-minded concerning research just as valid as yours.
]]>By: Darren Uhttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343188
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:16:59 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343188Thank you, Dennis W., very well put.
]]>By: Dave Shttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343187
Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:08:18 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343187Let’s talk about the SOLUTIONS that I have proposed to Federal and State officials. Yuma, AZ has abundant geothermal resources. New geothermal plants, without any pollution, can power water desalination plants. Thus, we can develop agriculture with fresh water, create jobs at new plants and supply water to San Diego and Orange Counties, solving another California problem–water shortages. Less talk and more action.
]]>By: Seattle Dadhttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343183
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:53:57 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343183I agree with Dennis W except the science does not point to a man made climate increase. First it was Global Warming, then it switched to Climate change when the temps started to drop and now the stolen emails have revealed the subterfuge by the global warming scientists who have been working to restrict the publishing of contrary theories and evidence. I’m reluctant to call such people scientists! So Dennis, turn off the Al Gore and the Day after Tomorrow videos. Climate change is something humans cannot control. It’s been much warmer and much colder that today without the aide of the human race.
]]>By: Dennis Whttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343178
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:17:21 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343178You deniers out there, pay attention: the predictions you’re hearing will apply directly to you, not far in the future, and definitely to your beloved children. Think about this: Two buildings in New York come down and the stock market goes into free fall, and the world economy is fractured. Now think about New York City, L.A., Buenos Aires, Miami, London, Lisbon, Alexandria, all under water–then multiply those cities by 10,000 more. Economic impact? Millions of environmental refugees wanting YOUR land, maybe? Trade and commerce in ruin, you think? I hope you don’t have kids, because they will not remember you fondly for what your obstruction will have done to them.Amazing how many “civilized” people still don’t believe in science. Or, you believe in science when it sends a rocket to Pluto or unscrambles human DNA or builds you a better iPod, but if it affects how much money you might have to spend, suddenly science is “a bunch of liberals trying to scare us” for…some reason that I’m sure you’ve worked out. And sure enough, you’re back in your knee-jerk Flat Earth hideyhole. Well, science either “works” or it doesn’t work–it’s a method, not a bunch of hippies playing psychotic games with the human race. You can’t pick and choose when science works according to your biases. And thousands of scientists KNOW climate change is real and getting worse fast. And about three–most of them tied to economic interests–don’t.Get a little basic education about what science is and does, and maybe you’ll decide to save your kids from a waking hell.
]]>By: scientisthttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343176
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:50:06 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343176Climate change and greenhouse gas is a religion. No amount of science can convert the ignorant gullible superstitious from their god.
]]>By: Youri Carmahttp://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/11/23/biggest-california-co2-emitter-is/comment-page-1/#comment-343169
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:54:40 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=14657#comment-343169The CO2 Hoax is a fraud for an one world government and taxes. CO2 Hoax has been made up by the Club of Rome, the Bildermeeting and Trilateral commission “Humans as their own Enemy” very cunningly. Plants “breath” CO2 and the more CO2 the better plants grow. Ice monsters show 100% scientifical evidence that CO2 levels always rise after Earth warming NEVER BEFORE! The greatest harm these scamsters cause to Nature is that nobody talks about the real pollutants anymore. Did you hear the term “Acid Rain” lately?
]]>